|The plaintiffs are entitled to a preliminary injunction against the firing-range ban. The harm to their Second Amendment rights cannot be remedied by damages, their challenge has a strong likelihood of success on the merits, and the City's claimed harm to the public interest is based entirely on speculation.

|The plaintiffs are entitled to a preliminary injunction against the firing-range ban. The harm to their Second Amendment rights cannot be remedied by damages, their challenge has a strong likelihood of success on the merits, and the City's claimed harm to the public interest is based entirely on speculation.

18 U.S.C. §§ 921(a)(33), 922(d)(9) and 922(g)(9) violates the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution because it imposes a lifetime ban on the exercise of a fundamental constitutional “right to keep and bear arms” after conviction of a minor crime.

We requested that the Court consider whether: 1) the right to possess and carry a firearm for self-defense extends outside the home, and 2) it is constitutional to prohibit law-abiding citizens’ possession and carrying of loaded weapons in motor vehicles while on National Park Service land.

Whether peaceably carrying or transporting a registered handgun outside the home, without a carry permit that is unobtainable by ordinary, law-abiding citizens, is outside of the scope of “the right of the people to . . . bear arms” protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Whether the “right to keep and bear arms” as enunciated in Heller applies retroactively to a person who possessed a handgun in his own home without a registration certificate that was not obtainable at that time by ordinary, law-abiding citizens; and had not asserted his Second Amendment right at a trial held prior to Heller.

The requirement to keep handguns unloaded or trigger locked or otherwise in a locked case is unconstitutional.The suit also challenges the fact that the "no discharge" ordinance has no exception for self defense. Further the suit challenges the ban on the sale of hollow point ammunition or any ammunition that is not suitable for "sporting purposes" in San Francisco.

Supreme Court Decisions

We have previously held that most of the provisions of the Bill of Rights apply with full force to both the Federal Government and the States. Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States.

The Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

The National Firearms Act, as applied to one indicted for transporting in interstate commerce a 12-gauge shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches long without having registered it and without having in his possession a stamp-affixed written order for it, as required by the Act, held: Not unconstitutional, does not violate of the Second Amendment.

Case Law

The plaintiffs are entitled to a preliminary injunction against the firing-range ban. The harm to their Second Amendment rights cannot be remedied by damages, their challenge has a strong likelihood of success on the merits, and the City's claimed harm to the public interest is based entirely on speculation.

Chester ... [is] ... a domestic violence misdemeanant. Accordingly, we conclude that intermediate scrutiny is more appropriate than strict scrutiny for Chester and similarly situated persons. Accordingly, the government must demonstrate under the intermediate scrutiny standard that there is a “reasonable fit” between the challenged regulation and a “substantial” government objective.

This was a challenge to the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA). The challenge failed because the 9th Circuit found that the Second Amendment does not confer and individual right to own and possess arms. The court did however invalidate a statutory exception with respect to retired peace officers; they can't purchase AW at retirement time.

Trial courts cannot determine if a given firearm/receiver is a member of AR or AK “series”. Banned weapons in AR/AK “series” must be specifically banned by make and model, and the DOJ must promulgate these banned firearms .

“[w]hile a court cannot compel a public officer to exercise his discretion in any particular manner, it may direct him to exercise that discretion.” The decision went on to declare that “[i]t is the duty of the sheriff to make such an investigation and determination, on an individual basis, on every application under section 12050.”

How the Federal Courts work

Civil Cases

A federal civil case involves a legal dispute between two or more parties. To begin a civil
lawsuit in federal court, the plaintiff files a complaint with the court and "serves" a copy
of the complaint on the defendant. The complaint describes the plaintiff's injury, explains
how the defendant caused the injury, and asks the court to order relief. A plaintiff may seek
money to compensate for the injury, or may ask the court to order the defendant to stop the
conduct that is causing the harm. The court may also order other types of relief, such as a
declaration of the legal rights of the plaintiff in a particular situation.
READ MORE HERE

The Appeals Process

The losing party in a decision by a trial court in the federal system normally is entitled to
appeal the decision to a federal court of appeals. Similarly, a litigant who is not satisfied
with a decision made by a federal administrative agency usually may file a petition for review
of the agency decision by a court of appeals. Judicial review in cases involving certain federal
agencies or programs — for example, disputes over Social Security benefits — may be obtained
first in a district court rather than a court of appeals.
In a civil case either side may appeal the verdict.
A litigant who files an appeal, known as an "appellant," must show that the trial court or
administrative agency made a legal error that affected the decision in the case. The court of
appeals makes its decision based on the record of the case established by the trial court or
agency. It does not receive additional evidence or hear witnesses. The court of appeals also
may review the factual findings of the trial court or agency, but typically may only overturn
a decision on factual grounds if the findings were "clearly erroneous."
Appeals are decided by panels of three judges working together. The appellant presents legal
arguments to the panel, in writing, in a document called a "brief." In the brief, the appellant
tries to persuade the judges that the trial court made an error, and that its decision should be
reversed. On the other hand, the party defending against the appeal, known as the "appellee,"
tries in its brief to show why the trial court decision was correct, or why any error made by the
trial court was not significant enough to affect the outcome of the case.
Although some cases are decided on the basis of written briefs alone, many cases are selected
for an "oral argument" before the court. Oral argument in the court of appeals is a structured
discussion between the appellate lawyers and the panel of judges focusing on the legal principles
in dispute. Each side is given a short time — usually about 15 minutes — to present arguments
to the court.
The court of appeals decision usually will be the final word in the case, unless it sends the
case back to the trial court for additional proceedings, or the parties ask the U.S. Supreme
Court to review the case. In some cases the decision may be reviewed en banc, that is, by a larger
group of judges (usually all) of the court of appeals for the circuit.
A litigant who loses in a federal court of appeals, or in the highest court of a state, may file
a petition for a "writ of certiorari," which is a document asking the Supreme Court to review the
case. The Supreme Court, however, does not have to grant review. The Court typically will agree to
hear a case only when it involves an unusually important legal principle, or when two or more federal
appellate courts have interpreted a law differently. There are also a small number of special
circumstances in which the Supreme Court is required by law to hear an appeal. When the Supreme Court
hears a case, the parties are required to file written briefs and the Court may hear oral argument.
READ MORE HERE

The Supreme Court of the United States of America

The United States Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of the United States and eight
associate justices. At its discretion, and within certain guidelines established by Congress,
the Supreme Court each year hears a limited number of the cases it is asked to decide. Those
cases may begin in the federal or state courts, and they usually involve important questions
about the Constitution or federal law.
The Supreme Court is the highest tribunal in the nation for all cases and controversies arising
under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. The Court stands as the final arbiter
of the law and guardian of constitutional liberties.
READ MORE HERE

RECAP - The RECAP Archive Access to millions of U.S. Federal District and Bankruptcy Court documents, without charge.

About this Page

This page is a work in progress. It may be further developed to separate "current litigation" into three tables. One table for litigation that directly affects California, another table for "persuasive case law" (Non-9th Circuit of Appeals cases), and "Other Litigation" for all other interesting U.S. District or other Non California State litigation.

What this page should not ever be is a universal place to keep track of the hundreds of 2A cases currently in motion in the United States.